[erlang-questions] Mystery of good term gone bad

Edwin Fine <>
Tue Jul 28 21:14:32 CEST 2009


Sverker,

It is from error log messages I have been getting from communications
between two Erlang nodes on the same physical server. One node is an
application of ours, the other is an ejabberd server. The communications
between our node and the ejabberd server have gone bad. I can ping and remsh
to ejabberd server no problem, but I cannot ping or remsh our application
node from anywhere without getting the error messages below. Restarting
everything doesn't help. I sent an earlier post with the details but it
somehow didn't make it to the mailing list.

They look like this:

=ERROR REPORT==== 28-Jul-2009::11:40:13 ===
Got corrupted message on channel 4133


=ERROR REPORT==== 28-Jul-2009::11:40:13 ===
Got invalid data on distribution channel, offending packet is:
<<112,131,104,4,97,6,103,78,131,0,20,119,99,116,112,103,
  119,95,114,101,108,64,108,111,99,97,108,104,111,115,116,
  0,0,0,12,0,0,0,0,2,78,5,0,0,78,110,0,18,103,108,111,98,
  97,108,95,110,97,109,101,95,115,101,114,118,101,114,131,
  104,2,78,248,0,9,36,103,101,110,95,99,97,115,116,104,4,
  78,65,0,12,105,110,105,116,95,99,111,110,110,101,99,116,
  104,2,97,5,104,3,98,0,0,4,224,98,0,12,35,221,98,0,14,69,
  8,67,131,104,4,78,76,0,6,108,111,99,107,101,114,78,77,0,
  15,110,111,95,108,111,110,103,101,114,95,97,95,112,105,
  100,106,103,67,131,0,0,0,13,0,0,0,0,2>>

Regards,
Ed


On Tue, Jul 28, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Sverker Eriksson
<>wrote:

> Edwin Fine wrote:
>
>> Can anyone tell me why the binary to term conversion shown below is "good"
>> on systems 1, 2, and 3, and bad in system 4, when the binaries are
>> identical
>> across all of them? Surely R13B01 should be backward-compatible at the
>> binary level?
>>
>> Systems 1 & 2: R13B
>> System 3: R12B-4
>> System 4: R13B01
>>
>>
> :
>
>> <<131,104,4,97,6,103,78,131,0,20,119,99,116,112,103,119,
>>  95,114,101,108,64,108,111,99,97,108,104,111,115,116,0,0,
>>  0,12,0,0,0,0,2,78,5,0,0,78,110,0,18,103,108,111,98,97,
>>  108,95,110,97,109,101,95,115,101,114,118,101,114,131,
>>  104,2,78,248,0,9,36,103,101,110,95,99,97,115,116,104,4,
>>  78,65,0,12,105,110,105,116,95,99,111,110,110,101,99,116,
>>  104,2,97,5,104,3,98,0,0,4,224,98,0,12,35,221,98,0,14,79,
>>  143,67,131,104,4,78,76,0,6,108,111,99,107,101,114,78,77,
>>  0,15,110,111,95,108,111,110,103,101,114,95,97,95,112,
>>  105,100,106,103,67,131,0,0,0,13,0,0,0,0,2>>.
>>
>>
> Where did you get that binary from? It looks like the *internal* format
> used by the distribution when communicating terms between nodes. This format
> was changed in R13B01.
> You could maybe argue that the old versions should give badarg for this
> binary.
>
> /Sverker, Erlang/OTP
>
>
>


More information about the erlang-questions mailing list